Computing and accessing quality indicators of computer applications

ABSTRACT

A quality score for a computer application release is determined using a first number of unique users who have launched the computer application release on user devices and a second number of unique users who have encountered at least once an abnormal termination with the computer application release on user devices. Additionally or optionally, an application quality score can be computed for a computer application based on quality scores of computer application releases that represent different versions of the computer application. Additionally or optionally, a weighted application quality score can be computed for a computer application by further taking into consideration the average application quality score and popularity of a plurality of computer applications.

TECHNOLOGY

The present invention relates generally to computer applicationreleases, and in particular, to computing and accessing qualityindicators of computer applications.

BACKGROUND

The popularity of computer applications depends on many factors such asquality, timing, functionality, market demands, etc. Among thesefactors, the quality of a computer application is expected to be a largedeterminant factor influencing the popularity of the computerapplication. Particularly, a computer application may only represent onechoice among many different computer applications in a crowded field.Users who have ready access to computing devices such as mobile devicescan easily choose to stay with an existing computer application orswitch from one computer application to another computer applicationuntil a satisfying computer application is found. Even for the samecomputer application, different releases may be of different qualitiesand thus produce different levels of satisfactions and popularities.

However, assessing the quality of computer applications is oftendifficult in a highly diverse, mobile environment where users can usemany different types of devices and have many different choices ofcomputer applications. As a result, many approaches of assessing thequality of computer applications require high costs, yet still produceonly inaccurate, unreliable, repetitive, partial, anecdotal results.

The approaches described in this section are approaches that could bepursued, but not necessarily approaches that have been previouslyconceived or pursued. Therefore, unless otherwise indicated, it shouldnot be assumed that any of the approaches described in this sectionqualify as prior art merely by virtue of their inclusion in thissection. Similarly, issues identified with respect to one or moreapproaches should not assume to have been recognized in any prior art onthe basis of this section, unless otherwise indicated.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

The present invention is illustrated by way of example, and not by wayof limitation, in the figures of the accompanying drawings and in whichlike reference numerals refer to similar elements and in which:

FIG. 1 depicts an example configuration in which some embodiments mayoperate;

FIG. 2 depicts an example application event report emitter on a userdevice;

FIG. 3 depicts an example application quality measurement system;

FIG. 4 depicts an example display page that provides quality indicatorsof a computer application;

FIG. 5A through FIG. 5B depict example process flows; and

FIG. 6 depicts an example hardware platform on which a computer or acomputing device as described herein may be implemented.

DESCRIPTION OF EXAMPLE EMBODIMENTS

Example embodiments, which relate to computing and accessing qualityindicators of computer applications, are described herein. In thefollowing description, for the purposes of explanation, numerousspecific details are set forth in order to provide a thoroughunderstanding of the present invention. It will be apparent, however,that the present invention may be practiced without these specificdetails. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are notdescribed in exhaustive detail, in order to avoid unnecessarilyoccluding, obscuring, or obfuscating the present invention.

Example embodiments are described herein according to the followingoutline:

-   -   1. GENERAL OVERVIEW    -   2. STRUCTURE OVERVIEW    -   3. APPLICATION EVENT REPORT EMITTER    -   4. APPLICATION QUALITY MEASUREMENT SYSTEM    -   5. EXAMPLE QUALITY SCORE COMPUTATIONS    -   6. EXAMPLE PROCESS FLOWS    -   7. IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMS—HARDWARE OVERVIEW    -   8. EQUIVALENTS, EXTENSIONS, ALTERNATIVES AND MISCELLANEOUS

1. General Overview

This overview presents a basic description of some aspects ofembodiment(s) of the present invention. It should be noted that thisoverview is not an extensive or exhaustive summary of aspects of theembodiment. Moreover, it should be noted that this overview is notintended to be understood as identifying any particularly significantaspects or elements of the embodiment(s), nor as delineating any scopeof the embodiment(s) in particular, nor the invention in general. Thisoverview merely presents some concepts that relate to exampleembodiments in a condensed and simplified format, and should beunderstood as merely a conceptual prelude to a more detailed descriptionof example embodiments that follows below.

Computer applications such as mobile applications can be deployed orlaunched on a wide variety of computing devices. Given many choices ofcomputer applications, users expect more from the computer applicationsthat are selected than from other computer applications that are notselected. For example, a user may try out a few computer applicationswith similar functionalities and select a winner that is relativelystable, relatively up-to-date, relatively fast in release delivery,relatively rich in functionalities or options, etc., among the computerapplications. Satisfied users tend to reward their favorite computerapplications with better ratings, more positive social networkingfeedbacks, higher usage, higher loyalty, etc.

Techniques as described herein can be used to compute and assess qualityindicators of computer applications with a high degree of accuracy,reliability, completeness, etc., as compared with other approaches.

In some embodiments, computer application releases can be instrumentedto emit two simple types of application event reports, namelyapplication launch event reports and application abnormal terminationreports. The instrumentation of a computer application release foremitting these types of application event reports can be made byincorporating a sequence of code, a computer class, a computer object, acomputer function, etc., from an instrumented code source (e.g., asystem development kit, a code library, etc.) at a programming time,compilation time, linking time, machine code assembly time, runtime,etc. Additionally, optionally, or alternatively, instrumented code foremitting these types of application event reports may be incorporatedinto entities that are parts (e.g., responsible for process management,etc.) of runtime environments of the computer application releases.

Application event reports such as application launch report events,application abnormal termination report events, etc., can be collectedby a computer application quality measurement system with any of a widevariety of communication mechanisms (e.g., internet, WiFi, small messageservice or SMS, instant messaging, connectionless transport,connectionless transport, constant network access, transient networkaccess, fast network connection, slow network connection, etc.) from awide variety of diverse user devices on which the computer applicationreleases have been launched by users.

Based on the application launch event reports received for a computerapplication release, the total number of unique users who have launchedthe computer application release in any given time period can bedetermined, regardless of how many times each of these users haslaunched the computer application release in the given time period.Likewise, based on the application abnormal termination event reportsreceived for the computer application release, the total number ofaffected unique users who have experienced abnormal terminations of thecomputer application release in the given time period can be determined,regardless of how many times each of these users has experiencedabnormal terminations of the computer application release in the giventime period.

A quality score of the computer application release in the given periodcan then be computed using the total number of unique users and thetotal number of affected unique users in the given period. In someembodiments, the quality score can be represented by a percentile ofunaffected unique users (the total number of unique users minus thetotal number of affected unique users) in the total number of uniqueusers in the given period. In these embodiments, a quality score of acomputer application release is a value in a score range of 0-100. Inother embodiments, different score ranges can be used.

If a computer application has multiple (computer application) releases,an individual quality score can be computed for each of some or all ofthe computer application releases. In some embodiments, the computerapplication quality measurement system computes up to two individualscores for the last two releases or versions of a computer application.In some embodiments, an overall quality score of a computer applicationcan be computed as a value such as an average derived from one or moreindividual quality scores of one or more releases or versions of thecomputer application.

To better compare a computer application with other computerapplications, techniques as described herein can also be used to computea weighted quality score incorporating popularity information for thecomputer application, popularity and quality score information for aplurality of computer applications that may or may not include thecomputer application, etc.

Quality scores as described herein are computed based on verifiablemetrics derived from application events that occur with computerapplications. Techniques as described herein can be used to preventerrors and uncertainty caused by overactive users or dormant users fromunduly influencing quality scores of computer applications or theirreleases.

Under techniques as described herein, quality scores can be computed ona real-time basis or on a non-real-time basis. For example, any of thequality scores as described herein can be computed in response toreceiving a query for quality measurement of a computer application or acomputer application release. On the other hand, some or all of thequality scores as described herein can be pre-computed (or computedbefore receiving the query discussed above), for example, at the end ofa specific time period, weekly or biweekly on a rolling basis, monthly,yearly, etc.

Quality scores as described herein can be provided to applicationquality client queries in any of a wide variety of ways. In someembodiments, a graphic display pane or page can be created and deliveredto an application quality query client for accessing or viewing qualityscores in different granularity levels or bases. For example, with asingle glance at quality scores of two latest versions of a computerapplication, an application quality query client such as a mobileapplication team, etc., can obtain an objective measure such as aquality score calculated based at least in part on application crashesand thus may be indicative of user satisfaction and of the impact thelatest version and/or the latest error fixes had on user satisfaction.In some situations, quality scores above a first threshold (e.g., systemconfigurable, user configurable, set to a default value but may beoverridden by a system and/or a user, etc.) such as 80 in the scorerange of 0-100 may be indicative of high user satisfaction; qualityscores below a second threshold such as 40 in the score range of 0-100may be indicative of a warning that users are disengaging.

Quality scores as described herein can also be used to evaluate relativequalities of different releases or versions of the same computerapplication. For example, if a new version of the computer applicationhas a score of 77 as compared with a prior version that has a score of70, the mobile application team has made priority fixes that matter mostto users/customers.

A variety of clients can use quality scores computed under techniques asdescribed herein. For example, weighted quality indicators and otherpopularity measures, as computed on the basis of unique users, can beused together to assess the quality and popularity of a computerapplication or a computer application release by one or more ofadvertisers who use computer application releases to advertise,investors interested in application developers or mobile applications,potential clients interested in gauging/tracking the quality andpopularity of computer applications, etc.

Various modifications to the preferred embodiments and the genericprinciples and features described herein will be readily apparent tothose skilled in the art. Thus, the disclosure is not intended to belimited to the embodiments shown, but is to be accorded the widest scopeconsistent with the principles and features described herein.

2. Structure Overview

FIG. 1 depicts an example configuration 100 comprising a computerapplication quality measurement system 102, zero, one or more (e.g.,cloud-based, on-premise, etc.) computer application stores 104, zero,one or more (e.g., cloud-based, on-premise, etc.) application servers106, one or more user devices 108, one or more application quality querydevices 110, etc. As illustrated in FIG. 1, the computer applicationquality measurement system (102) may be communicatively and/oroperatively linked with the computer application stores (104), theapplication servers (106), the (set of, population of, etc.) userdevices (108), the application quality query devices (110), etc., viaone or more computer networks 112. The computer networks (112) mayinclude, but are not limited to only, any of: the Internet, intranets,local area networks, wide area networks, wired network links, wirelessnetwork links, etc.

As used herein, a user device refers to a computing device that is usedby one or more users to launch zero, one or more computer applicationreleases of which zero, one or more application event reports can besent to the application quality measurement system (102). In someembodiments, a user's permission is required for the user device to sendapplication event reports to the application quality measurement system(102). In some embodiments, the user device is communicatively linkedwith the application quality measurement system (102) at least for someperiods of time, but not necessarily constantly; for example, the userdevice may be communicatively linked with the application qualitymeasurement system (102) only when the user device is at a locationwhere network access is available to the user device. In someembodiments, an application event report is not sent by a user device tothe application quality measurement system (102) at a first time whenthe subject matter of the application event report occurs, but rather issent by the user device to the application quality measurement system(102) at a second time (later than the first time) when network accessis available to the user device for sending the application event reportto the application quality measurement system (102).

In some embodiments, application event reports sent from the userdevices (108) to the application quality measurement system (102)consist only of two types of application event reports: namelyapplication launch log events and application abnormal termination logevents. In some other embodiments, application event reports sent by theuser devices (108) to the application quality measurement system (102)comprises more than application launch log events and applicationabnormal termination log events.

A computer application release as described herein refers to a releaseor version of a specific computer application; one or more qualityscores relating to the specific computer application is to be computedby the computer application measurement system (102). Application eventreports collected by the computer application quality measurement system(102) from the user devices (108) may be processed and used by thecomputer application quality measurement system (102) to calculate oneor more quality scores relating to the specific computer application.

A computer application release can be obtained by a user device in theuser devices (108) from any of a variety of computer application sourcessuch as one or more of the computer application stores (104), theapplication servers (106), another user device in the user devices(108), etc.

In some embodiments, a computer application release may have beenpre-installed, pre-configured, pre-upgraded, etc., on a user devicebefore a user uses the user device.

In some embodiments, a computer application release as described hereinmay not have been installed; for example, an application server (e.g., acloud-based application server, an on-premise application server, etc.)in the application servers (106) can be accessed for downloading ondemand.

In some embodiments, a computer application release as described hereinmay not even need to be installed on a user device; for example, anapplication server (e.g., a cloud-based application server, anon-premise application server, etc.) in the application servers (106)can be accessed to launch on demand.

In some embodiments, different users who use any, some, or all of, theuser devices (108) launch different mixes of computer applicationreleases. In an example, some users may launch computer applicationreleases representing versions of some computer applications, while someother users may launch other computer application releases representingversions of other computer applications. In another example, some usersmay launch a computer application release representing the latestofficial version of a computer application, while some other users maylaunch one or more other computer application releases representing oneor more versions of the computer application other than the latestofficial version of the computer application.

An application quality query device as described herein refers to acomputing device that is configured to query a computer applicationquality measurement system (e.g., 102, etc.) for quality indications ofone or more computer applications, receive one or more qualityindications relating to the one or more computer applications, etc.Examples of application quality query devices may include, but are notlimited to only, any of: the application store (104), the applicationservers (106), the user devices (108), application developers' computingdevices, etc.

In some embodiments, permission is implicitly or explicitly required inorder for a user device 108 to send, the computer application qualitymeasurement system 102 to receive, or a query device 110 to access aquality indication for a specific computer application. In someembodiments, quality indications of computer application releases may belimited to application developers of the computer application releases.In some embodiments, users with accounts that have been granted specificpermissions can access quality indications of computer applicationreleases. In some embodiments, an application store is allowed to accessquality indications of computer application releases it sells. In someembodiments, quality indications of one or more computer applicationreleases are open for any users to access so long as network access tothe computer application quality measurement system (102) is availableto the users.

More or fewer entities depicted in FIG. 1 may be present in a specificconfiguration for computing and accessing quality indicators of computerapplication releases or computer applications. For example, in someembodiments, there may be no application store present in an actualconfiguration; computer application releases can be delivered to userdevices or launched by users without any participation of applicationstores. In some embodiments, one or more separately depicted entities inFIG. 1 may be a single system, a single device, etc., in a specificconfiguration for computing and accessing quality indicators of computerapplication releases or computer applications. For example, anapplication quality query client can also be a user device, anapplication store, an application server, etc.

3. Application Event Report Emitter

FIG. 2 depicts example application event report emitter 202 on a userdevice 108-1 (e.g., one of the user devices 108 of FIG. 1, etc.). Asused herein, an application event report emitter (e.g., 202, etc.)refers to an entity that is configured to generate one or moreapplication event reports, send the application event reports, astriggered by events of launches, abnormal terminations, etc., of acomputer application release (e.g., 208, etc.) on a user device (e.g.,108-1, etc.), to a computer application quality measurement system(e.g., 102 of FIG. 1, etc.), etc. In some embodiments, the applicationevent report emitter (202) may be a part of the crashing applicationrelease and may implement an exception catching routine that catches anexception indicative of an impending crash of the crashing applicationrelease and sends one or more application event reports indicating theimpending crash to the computer application quality measurement system(102). In some embodiments, the application event report emitter (202)may be a part of an application monitor (which optionally oradditionally may be configured to launch, clean up, etc., theapplication release) and may implement an event reporting routine thatdetect a crash of the previously running application release and sendsone or more application event reports indicating the crash to thecomputer application quality measurement system (102). In someembodiments, such an application monitor may be a part of an operatingsystem (e.g., IOS, linux, Windows, Android, etc.), a virtual machine(e.g., a Java virtual machine, a virtual machine running on a host,etc.), etc., in which the crashing application release was running. Insome embodiments, the application event report emitter (202) may sendsome or all application event reports in real time, for example,immediately after events that trigger the application event reportoccur. In some embodiments, the application event report emitter (202)may send some or all of the application event reports after delays ofsome length (e.g., when network access is available for sending thereports to a recipient system, etc.) from the times when events thattrigger the application event report occur.

In some embodiments, the application event report emitter (202) may sendsome or all of the application event reports directly to the computerapplication quality measurement system (102). In some embodiments, theapplication event report emitter (202) may send some or all of theapplication event reports indirectly to the computer application qualitymeasurement system (102) through one or more intermediate systems, oneor more intermediate devices, etc.

An example of application event report emitter may include, but are notlimited to only, any of: a computer application release (or anexecutable instance of the computer application release), an operatingsystem in which a computer application release (or an executableinstance of the computer application release) is launched, anapplication process monitor that monitors a computer application release(or an executable instance of the computer application release) on auser device, etc.

In some embodiments, the application event report emitter (202)comprises specifically instrumented code (e.g., functions, methods,classes, variables, sequences of computing instructions, etc.) for someor all of the functionality involved in generating, sending, etc.,application event reports. Instrumented code refers to specific sourcecode or binary code incorporated into or implemented by an applicationrelease for emitting logging messages, traces, application eventreports, etc. The instrumented code may be generated, derived, etc.,from an instrumented code source (206) such as a system development kit(SDK), a computer code library, a file, a class, a compiler, anassembler, etc.

An application event report may comprise a plurality of data items.Examples of data items in an application event report may include, butare not limited to only, any of: a unique user identifier (UUID), acomputer application release identifier, a clock line indicating a timeat which a corresponding event (e.g., an application launching event, anapplication abnormal termination event, an impending applicationabnormal termination, etc.) that triggers the generation of theapplication event report occurs, a type (e.g., an application launchingevent, an application abnormal termination event, etc.) of event, a userdevice identifier, an operating system identifier, geo locationinformation about a geo location at which the event occurs, informationabout system conditions under which the event occurs, etc.

Under techniques as described herein, errors (e.g., as indicated incollected application event reports, etc.) that cause crashes of anapplication or an application release can be classified as specifictypes of errors: for example, “out of memory errors,” “timeout errors,”etc. In some embodiments, an application quality score (e.g., ascomputed in expressions (2) and (3), etc.) can be calculated to indicate(or to be based at least in part on) a ratio of the number of uniqueusers of an application or an application release that experience aspecific type of error (e.g., “out of memory errors,” “timeout error,”etc.) and the total number of unique users of the application or theapplication release, in a given time period. In an example, a firstapplication quality score specific to “out of memory errors” may bedetermined as a ratio of the number of unique users of an application oran application release that experience “out of memory errors” and thetotal number of unique users of the application or the applicationrelease, in a time period (e.g., current week, current month, previousweek, previous month, etc.). In another example, a second applicationquality score specific to “timeout errors” may be determined as a ratioof the number of unique users of an application or an applicationrelease that experience “timeout errors” and the total number of uniqueusers of the application or the application release, in a time period(e.g., current week, current month, previous week, previous month,etc.).

In some embodiments, an application quality score (e.g., as computed inexpressions (2) and (3), etc.) can be calculated to indicate (or to bebased at least in part on) a ratio of the number of unique users of anapplication or an application release that runs in a specific type ofoperating environments or systems (e.g., IOS, Android, etc.) and thetotal number of unique users of the application or the applicationrelease (that runs in the specific type of operating environments orsystems), in a given time period. In an example, a third applicationquality score specific to IOS may be determined as a ratio of the numberof unique users of an application or an application release that runs inthe IOS and the total number of unique users of the application or theapplication release (that runs in the IOS), in a time period (e.g.,current week, current month, previous week, previous month, etc.). Inanother example, a fourth application quality score specific to Androidmay be determined as a ratio of the number of unique users of anapplication or an application release that runs in the Android and thetotal number of unique users of the application or the applicationrelease (that runs in the Android), in a time period (e.g., currentweek, current month, previous week, previous month, etc.). In someembodiments, an application quality score can be even made specific to aversion of operating environment or system. In some embodiments, aseparate application quality score can be computed for each of differentversions of the same type of operating environment or OS.

In some embodiments, an application quality score (e.g., as computed inexpressions (2) and (3), etc.) can be calculated to indicate (or to bebased at least in part on) a ratio of the number of unique users of anapplication or an application release who are located at a specific geolocation (e.g., a country, a state, a city, a township, within ageographic area, etc.) and the total number of unique users of theapplication or the application release (who are located at the specificgeo location), in a given time period. In an example, a fifthapplication quality score specific to Philadelphia may be determined asa ratio of the number of unique users of an application or anapplication release who are in Philadelphia and the total number ofunique users of the application or the application release (who are inPhiladelphia), in a time period (e.g., current week, current month,previous week, previous month, etc.). In another example, a sixthapplication quality score specific to San Francisco may be determined asa ratio of the number of unique users of an application or anapplication release who are in San Francisco and the total number ofunique users of the application or the application release (who are inSan Francisco), in a time period (e.g., current week, current month,previous week, previous month, etc.).

In some embodiments, an application quality score (e.g., as computed inexpressions (2) and (3), etc.) can be calculated to indicate (or to bebased at least in part on) a ratio of the number of unique users of anapplication or an application release that runs on a specific type ofdevices (e.g., Samsung, Apple, HTC, etc.) and the total number of uniqueusers of the application or the application release (that runs on thespecific type of devices), in a given time period. In an example, aseventh application quality score specific to Samsung devices may bedetermined as a ratio of the number of unique users of an application oran application release that runs on a Samsung device and the totalnumber of unique users of the application or the application release(that runs on a Samsung device), in a time period (e.g., current week,current month, previous week, previous month, etc.). In another example,a fourth application quality score specific to Apple devices may bedetermined as a ratio of the number of unique users of an application oran application release that runs on an Apple device and the total numberof unique users of the application or the application release (that runson an Apple device), in a time period (e.g., current week, currentmonth, previous week, previous month, etc.). In some embodiments, anapplication quality score can be even made specific to a version ofoperating environment or system. In some embodiments, separateapplication quality scores can be computed for different models orversions of devices from the same vendor.

In various embodiments, an application event report may consist of moreor fewer data items than those as mentioned herein. In some embodiments,some data items may be optional; an application event report may omitthose data items. In some embodiments, some data items (e.g., UUID, acomputer application release identifier, one or more data itemsspecifying the time of occurrence of a triggering event, one or moredata items specifying the type of the triggering event, etc.) may berequired; an application event report may not omit those data items.Different implementations may define, select, designate, etc., differentsets of data items as optional, required, etc.

A UUID represents an (e.g., alphanumeric, binary, composite, etc.)identifier that distinctly identifies a user from all other users. Insome embodiments, a UUID is an identifier of a registered user of a userdevice (e.g., a mobile device, a tablet device, a laptop computer, adesktop computer, a wearable computing device, etc.).

A computer application release identifier represents an (e.g.,alphanumeric, binary, composite, etc.) identifier that distinctlyidentifies a computer application release from all other computerapplication releases. In some embodiments, a computer applicationrelease identifier is an identifier assigned by an application developerof the computation application release, an application store, anapplication server, etc.

4. Application Quality Measurement System

FIG. 3 depicts an example application quality measurement system (e.g.,102 of FIG. 1, etc.). In various embodiments, the application qualitymeasurement system (102) may be implemented as a single server system, asystem comprising a set of multiple servers, etc. In some embodiments,the application quality measurement system (102) comprises anapplication event report collector 302, an application qualitycomputation module 304, an application quality query processor 306, anapplication quality data repository 308, an application dashboard 310,etc.

In some embodiments, the application event report collector (302)comprises software components, hardware components, a combination ofsoftware and hardware components, etc., configured to collectapplication event reports from any of a variety of user devices (e.g.,the user devices 108 of FIG. 8), store the application event reports inthe application quality data repository (308), etc. In some embodiments,at least some of the application event reports are collected in realtime or in near real time by the application event report collector(302) immediately (e.g., within a second, within a fraction of a second,within a fixed number of seconds, etc.) after events triggering theapplication event reports occur. In some embodiments, at least some ofthe application event reports are collected by the application eventreport collector (302) after various delays (e.g., when network accessis available for sending the reports to a recipient system, etc.) fromthe times when events triggering the application event reports occur.

An application event report may be received by the computer applicationquality measurement system (102), or the application event reportcollector (302) therein, over a connection-oriented, or alternativelyconnection-less, network transport. The application event report can beformatted in any of a variety of data formats including but not limitedonly to XML, HTML, delimited text, a binary format, ashort-message-service (SMS) message, instant messages, etc.

In some embodiments, the application event report collector (302) isconfigured to receive and store application event reports into theapplication quality data repository (308). Additionally, optionally, oralternatively, in some embodiments, the application event reportcollector (302) is configured to process application event reports asreceived, generate processed information based on the application eventreports, store the processed information, etc., into the applicationquality data repository (308). In some embodiments, the processedinformation may comprise more concise information than that in theapplication event reports. In some embodiments, the processedinformation may incorporate additional information (e.g., referenceinformation such as a subscriber name, etc., retrieved from a referencedata table at a server system based on a subscriber ID or device IDreceived in an application event report, etc.) from other available datasources—other than application event report emitters that send theapplication event reports—that may or may not be resident at thecomputer application quality measurement system (102).

In some embodiments, the latest application event report of a specifictype (e.g., application launch event type, application abnormaltermination event type, events indicating specific errors, eventsindicating specific operating environments or systems, events indicatingspecific vendors/models, events indicating specific geo locations, etc.)from a unique user is stored in a specific application event reportset—e.g., in the application quality data repository (308), etc.—that isdesignated to store the latest application event reports of the specifictype from all unique users; up to only one such application event reportmay be stored in the specific application event report set. Theapplication quality computation module (304) can make use of such anapplication event report set, or a collection of such application eventreport sets for a plurality of event types, to generate qualityindications relatively efficiently and responsively of a specificcomputer application release, two or more computer application releases,up to all computer application releases for which application eventreports are collected.

In some embodiments, the application quality data repository (308)comprises software components, hardware components, a combination ofsoftware and hardware components, etc., configured to store applicationevent reports, processed information generated from the applicationevent reports, additional information (e.g., reference information,configuration information, operational parameter values, system and/oruser settings, authentication and/or authorization information, etc.)that is used in the operations of the computer application qualitymeasurement system (102), etc.

The application quality data repository (308) can include, but is notlimited to only, any of: relational databases, object-orienteddatabases, non-relational non-object-oriented databases, file-baseddatabases, multi-dimensional database, networked databases, cloud-based,on-premise, etc. In some embodiments, the application quality datarepository (308) is configured to support a set of data accessoperations such as related to defining, storing, retrieving, modifying,merging, deleting, etc., application event reports, processedinformation generated from the application event reports, applicationquality computation results, etc., for example, as performed by one ormore of the application event report collector (302), the applicationquality computation module (304), other modules in the computerapplication quality measurement system (102), other devices other thanthe computer application quality measurement system (102), etc. Dataitems received from application event reports, processed information,etc., may be stored in one or more data sets (e.g., data files, datatables, data objects, etc.) in the application quality data repository(308).

In some embodiments, the application quality computation module (304)comprises software components, hardware components, a combination ofsoftware and hardware components, etc., configured to be invoked (e.g.,by the application quality query processor 306, etc.) to compute qualityscores of computer application releases for which application eventreports have been collected. For example, the application qualitycomputation module (304) can receive a request for computing qualityscores of one or more computer application releases from the applicationquality query processor 306, retrieve application event reports, processinformation generated from the application event reports, etc., relatedto the computer application releases from the application quality datarepository (308), compute one or more quality indications of thecomputer application releases, etc.

In some embodiments, a request for computing quality scores, as receivedby the application quality computation module (304), may identify aspecific computer application release with a specific computerapplication identifier specified in the request or with information(specified in the request) that can be used to generate such a specificcomputer application identifier. In some embodiments, a request forcomputing quality scores may confine data to be used to compute qualityscores to a subset of all the data available for computing the qualityscores. For example, the request may identify data received from asubset of user devices to be used for such computing. The subset of userdevices may be based on a geographic locations (e.g., as indicated byGPS coordinates of the user devices, on a stretch of a highway, in ashopping mall, etc.), mobile communication carriers (e.g., AT&T,T-Mobile, Verizon, a carrier that offers a mobile application, etc.),time of day (e.g., rush hour, non-busy-hours, etc.), operating systems(e.g., Android, IOS, Windows, Windows RT, etc.), etc.

In some embodiments, a request for computing quality scores, as receivedby the application quality computation module (304), may comprisecomputer application information to identify a specific computerapplication but not any specific computer application releases. Theapplication quality computation module (304) may be configured toidentify the specific computer application based on the computerapplication information provided in the request; and further identify,based at least in part on the identified specific computer application,one or more specific computer application releases of the specificcomputer application. In some embodiments, the application qualitycomputation module (304) is configured to identify, based on theidentified specific computer application, a fixed number (e.g., the lasttwo, etc.) of computer application releases of the specific computerapplication.

The identification of a computer application release based on anidentified specific computer application can be made in any of a numberof methods. In an example, a reference data set comprising a mappingbetween computer applications and computer application releases may bequeried with a search key identifying the specific computer application.In another example, a dataset comprising application event reports maybe queried with computer application information identifying thespecific computer application. Multiple computer application releases ofthe specific computer applications can be ordered by their releasetimes, by a logical number indicating a release time order, etc. In someembodiments, up to a fixed number (e.g., the last two, etc.) of computerapplication releases of the specific computer application may beselected if more than the fixed number of computer application releasesof the specific computer application is returned from querying the datasets.

In some embodiments, the application quality query processor (306)comprises software components, hardware components, a combination ofsoftware and hardware components, etc., configured to receive one ormore computer application quality queries (or requests for qualityindications of computer applications or computer application releases)from one or more application quality query clients (e.g., query devices110 of FIG. 1, application dashboard 310, etc.); based at least in parton the computer application quality queries, identify one or more ofspecific computer applications, specific computer application releases,specific time periods, etc., for which quality scores are to becomputed, etc. In some embodiments, the application quality queryprocessor (306) is configured to retrieve pre-computed quality scores ofthe identified computer applications, the identified computerapplication releases in the identified time periods from the applicationquality data repository (308). In some embodiments, the applicationquality query processor (306) is configured to send quality scorerequests to the application quality computation module (304), receivequality scores of the identified computer applications, the identifiedcomputer application releases in the identified time periods from theapplication quality computation module (304). In response to thecomputer application quality queries, the application quality queryprocessor (306) returns the quality scores of the identified computerapplications, the identified computer application releases in theidentified time periods to the application quality query devices (110).

In some embodiments, the application dashboard (310) comprises softwarecomponents, hardware components, a combination of software and hardwarecomponents, etc., configured to provide graphic user interface (GUI)based access for application quality information to client devices suchas any of the application quality query devices (110), etc. For example,the application dashboard (310) can be configured to display a list ofcomputer applications (e.g., an IOS application, an Android application,a Windows application, etc.) available fordownloading/installation/launching to a user on a user device; receiveuser input representing a request for accessing quality scores of aspecific computer application; in response to receiving the user input,send a query to the application quality query processor (308); receiveapplication quality scores of the two latest versions of the specificcomputer application from the application quality query processor (308)in a response to the query; provide a graphic display page of theapplication quality scores of the two latest versions of the specificcomputer application, as illustrated in FIG. 4.

5. Example Quality Score Computations

In some embodiments, the computer application quality measurement system(102), or the application quality computation module (304) therein, isconfigured to determine the total number of unique users who havelaunched a specific computer application release, the total number ofaffected unique users who have experienced an abnormal termination ofthe specific computer application release, etc., within a specificbounded or unbounded time range.

A bounded time range refers to a time interval with a specific starttime and a specific end time. In some embodiments, a bounded time rangemay correspond to a calendar week, a calendar month, a different fixedtimer period, etc. An unbounded time range refers to a time range with aspecific end time but no specific start time. A specific end time can beimplicitly a time at which a request for a quality indication of thespecific computer application release is received by the computerapplication measurement system (102), or an explicit time specified in arequest for a quality indication of the specific computer applicationrelease as received by the computer application measurement system(102), etc.

The total number of unique users (e.g., individuals, visitors,subscribers, employees, etc.) for a computer application release (e.g.,a release or version of a mobile application, etc.) in a bounded orunbounded time range refers to the number of distinct users using acomputer application release in the time range, regardless of how ofteneach of these distinct users uses the computer application release inthe time range.

For example, a user as represented by a UUID may start multiple sessionsof a computer application release at multiple different times in a timerange such as a 7-day time range, a 30-day time range, etc. To determinethe total number of unique users in the time range for the computerapplication release, the user as represented by the UUID will be countedonly once in the total number of unique users. Accordingly, the totalnumber of unique users who have launched a specific computer applicationrelease, or the total number of affected unique users who haveexperienced an abnormal termination of the specific computer applicationrelease, in a bounded or unbounded time range refers to the number ofdistinct users who have launched the specific computer applicationrelease, or who have experienced an abnormal termination of the specificcomputer application release, in the time range, regardless of how ofteneach of these distinct users has launched the specific computerapplication release, or has experienced an abnormal termination of thespecific computer application release, in the time range.

In some embodiments, multiple users may share a user device. In someembodiments, for the purpose of determining the total number of uniqueusers or the total number of affected unique users, each of the multipleusers who share a user device is counted as a unique user; for example,each of the multiple users who share the user device is assigned a UUIDthat is different (or unique) from all other UUIDs assigned to otherusers including the others of the multiple users sharing the same userdevice.

In some other embodiments, for the purpose of determining the totalnumber of unique users or the total number of affected unique users,multiple users who share a single user device are counted as a singleunique user; for example, all of the multiple users who share the sameuser device are assigned the same UUID.

In some embodiments, for the purpose of determining the total number ofunique users or the total number of affected unique users, a user whouses multiple user devices is counted as a single unique user; forexample, a unique user is identified by, or assigned with, only a singleUUID that is different from all other UUIDs that identify other uniqueusers regardless of which user device the unique user uses to launch acomputer application release. This may be tracked using a login process,identification process, etc., that a user device has available to it. Tothe extent crashes experienced by a user can be used as a proxy for usersatisfaction, techniques as described herein can be used to determinehow many times a given user has experienced a crash in using aparticular application or a release thereof no matter which devices thegiven user uses to run the particular application or the releasethereof. The same user may use many cloud-based applications on multipledevices such as application releases or versions on tablets, desktopcomputers, smart phones, etc.

In some other embodiments, for the purpose of determining the totalnumber of unique users or the total number of affected unique users, auser (e.g., an individual, a natural person, etc.) who uses multipleuser devices is required to use a different UUID and is counted as adifferent unique user on each different user device of the multiple userdevices.

In some embodiments, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is configured to determine the total number of unique users whohave launched a specific computer application release from one or morespecific types of application event reports such as application launchevent reports, etc., as received from application event report emitters(e.g., 202, etc.) of the specific computer application release on theirrespective user devices (e.g., 304, etc.) and as stored in theapplication quality data repository (308).

For example, a computer application release comprising specificinstrumented code (e.g., from a bug tracking SDK, etc.) for emittingapplication event reports can emit an application launch event report(e.g., a “ping”, etc.) each time a user launches the computerapplication release on a user device. This application launch reportevent may be sent immediately after the event of launching the computerapplication release occurs, or after a delay (for example, when the userdevice such as a mobile device obtains network access to a computerapplication quality measurement system such as 102 of FIG. 1, etc.).

In some embodiments, each of the application launch report eventsreceived by the computer application quality measurement system (102)comprises a UUID representing a unique user, from which the total numberof unique users can be counted for a given time range such as a 7-daytime range, a 30-day time range, any time before now, any time before aspecific time in the past, etc.

In some embodiments, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is configured to determine the total number of affected uniqueusers who have experienced abnormal terminations of a specific computerapplication release from one or more specific types of application eventreports such as application abnormal termination event reports, etc., asreceived from application event report emitters (e.g., 202, etc.) of thespecific computer application release on their respective user devices(e.g., 304, etc.) and as stored in the application quality datarepository (308).

For example, a computer application release comprising specificinstrumented code (e.g., from the bug tracking SDK, etc.) for emittingapplication event reports can emit an application abnormal terminationevent report (e.g., a “crash” event report, etc.) each time a userexperiences an abnormal termination of the computer application releaseon a user device. This application abnormal termination report event maybe sent immediately after the event of launching the computerapplication release occurs, or after a delay (for example, when the userdevice such as a mobile device obtains network access to a computerapplication quality measurement system such as 102 of FIG. 1, etc.).

In some embodiments, each of the application abnormal termination reportevents received by the computer application quality measurement system(102) comprises a UUID representing a unique user, from which the totalnumber of affected unique users can be counted for a given time rangesuch as a 7-day time range, a 30-day time range, any time before now,any time before a specific time in the past, etc.

In some embodiments, the application quality computation module (306) isconfigured to use the total number of unique users and the total numberof affected unique users in a time period as some or all numeric inputin computing a quality score of the specific computer applicationrelease in the time period.

For example, a quality score, denoted as “MobDex_r”, of a computerapplication release may be computed as a percentage of the total numberof unaffected unique users in the total number of unique users, as shownin the following expression (which may be referred to as expression(1)):MobDex_(—) r=100*(unique_users−unique_users_affected)/unique_users  (1)where “unique_users” denotes the total number of unique users, and“unique_users_affected” denotes the total number of affected uniqueusers.

In some embodiments, a computer application may have multiple releasesor versions. In some embodiments, the application quality computationmodule (306) is configured to use individual quality scores of (e.g.,all, some, a fixed number of, etc.) individual computer applicationreleases of a computer application in a time period as some or allnumeric input in computing a quality score of the specific computerapplication in the time period.

For example, a quality score, denoted as “Average_MobDex”, of a computerapplication in a time period may be computed as an average of thequality scores of two latest computer application releases of thecomputer application in the time period if the computer application hasat least two computer application releases being used in the timeperiod, as illustrated in the following expression (which may bereferred to as expression (2)):Average_MobDex=(MobDex_(—) r _(—)1+MobDex_(—) r _(—)2)/2  (2)where “MobDex_r_(—)1” denotes the quality score of the latest-releasedversion of the computer application being used in the time period, and“MobDex_r_(—)2” denotes the quality score of the version of the computerapplication released immediately before the version of the applicationreflected in MobDex_r_(—)1 and being used in the time period.

For example, a computer application may have multiple computerapplication releases representing different versions of the computerapplication in a time period. Two latest computer application releasesof the computer application in the time period may have version numbersof “ver 2.20.1” and “ver2.20.0”, respectively. The version“ver_(—)2.20.1” of the computer application may have a quality score(denoted as MobDex_r_(—)1) of 89 in the time period, whereas the version“ver 2.20.0” of the computer application may have a quality score(denoted as MobDex_r_(—)1) of 95 in the same time period. As a result, aquality score, such as “Average_MobDex”, of the computer application inthe time period may be computed as an average of the two quality scoresof the two latest versions, namely 92.

Techniques as described herein provide a number of benefits over otherapproaches that do not implement these techniques. For example, a usercan launch a computer application release multiple times in a specifiedtime range. Thus, the total number of sessions could be greater, or evenmuch greater, than the number of unique users to various possibleextents. As a result, a quality measure computed with numeric input thatdoes not distinguish unique users does not represent a competent measureto indicate how many natural persons, individuals, etc., are satisfiedwith or affected by problems of a computer application or computerapplication release. In an extreme case, all fifty (50) launches of acomputer application release in a time range may be made by the sameuser. Thus, only one user would have been affected if all these launcheshad resulted in abnormal terminations of the computer applicationrelease. On the other hand, all fifty (50) launches of a computerapplication release in a time range may be also made by 50 unique users.Thus, all fifty distinct users could have been affected if all theselaunches had resulted in abnormal terminations of the computerapplication release.

In contrast, quality indicators computed under techniques as describedherein are based on numbers of unique users (e.g., unique individuals,unique visitors, etc.). As a result, uncertainty, inaccuracy,unreliability, etc., in computing quality indicators over a wide rangeof possible data sets can be prevented or reduced as compared with otherapproaches.

In addition, quality indicators computed based on numbers of uniqueusers are consistent with popularity measures that are computed based onthe same numbers of unique users. The quality indicators can be used bya variety of clients including, but not limited to only, any of:advertisers who use computer application releases to advertise,investors interested in application developers or computer applications,potential clients interested in gauging/tracking the quality andpopularity of computer applications, etc., with the popularity measurescomputed on the same basis.

In some embodiments, the quality of a specific computer applicationrelease or computer application needs to be evaluated against those ofmany other available computer application releases or other availablecomputer applications. For example, if a computer application releasehas only a single unique user in a time period, then the quality scoreof the computer application release will be either 100% or 0% in thetime period, neither of which is likely to be an adequate indication ofthe actual quality of the computer application release in a large userpopulation in the time period.

In some embodiments, the application quality computation module (306) isconfigured to compute a weighted quality score, denoted as“Weighted_MobDex”, of a specific computer application release or aspecific computer application, in a specific time period. In someembodiments, the computation of the weighted quality score in the timeperiod takes into account one or more factors including, but not limitedto, any of: other quality scores of other computer application releasesor other computer applications in the time period, popularity of thespecific computer application release or the specific computerapplication in the time period, popularity of the other computerapplication releases or the other computer applications in the timeperiod, etc.

In some embodiments, the application quality computation module (306) isconfigured to determine an individual quality score (e.g., an“average_MobDex”, etc.) in a time period for each individual computerapplication in a plurality of computer applications that correspond to aplurality of computer application releases for which application eventreports are collected by the computer application quality measurementsystem (102), determine an overall quality score in the time periodacross all computer applications in the plurality of computerapplications based on individual quality scores of all the computerapplications, etc. In some embodiments, the overall quality score in thetime period is computed as an average (denoted as “all_average_mobdex”)of all the individual quality scores in the time period of all thecomputer applications in the plurality of computer applications.

In some embodiments, the application quality computation module (306) isfurther configured to determine (1) an individual total number of uniqueusers (denoted as “application_unique_users”) in the time period foreach individual computer application in a plurality of computerapplications that correspond to a plurality of computer applicationreleases for which application event reports are collected by thecomputer application quality measurement system (102), and thendetermine an average total number of unique users (denoted as“all_average_sessions”) in the time period by averaging all individualtotal numbers of unique users (as determined in (1) above) over all thecomputer applications in the plurality of computer applications.

In some embodiments, the individual total number of unique users(“application_unique_users”) in the time period as previously mentionedcan be determined for a fixed number of most recent versions or releasesof a computer application (e.g., each individual computer application inthe plurality of computer applications as previously mentioned, etc.).The fixed number of most recent versions or releases of the computerapplication may consist of the same versions or releases of the computerapplication that are used to compute an individual quality score (e.g.,an “average_MobDex” as previously mentioned, etc.) for the computerapplication in the time period.

In some embodiments, an individual total number of unique users in atime period for an individual computer application as described hereincan be computed as the total number of distinct users who have launchedany of a fixed number of computer application releases representing thelatest versions of the individual computer application in the timeperiod, regardless of which specific computer application release of thefixed number of computer application releases was launched in the timeperiod.

In some embodiments, the application quality computation module (306) isconfigured to use an individual quality score (e.g., denoted as“average_MobDex” in expression (2), etc.) of a specific computerapplication, an individual total number of unique users (e.g.,“application_unique_users”, etc.) of the specific computer application,an average (e.g., “all_average_mobdex”, etc.) of all individual qualityscores of all the computer applications in a plurality of computerapplications, an average total number of unique users (e.g.,“all_average_sessions”, etc.) of all individual total numbers of uniqueusers of all the computer applications in the plurality of computerapplications, all in the same time period, as some or all numeric inputin computing a weighted quality score of the specific computerapplication in the time period, as illustrated in the followingexpression (which may be referred to as expression (3)):weighted_MobDex=(average_MobDex*unique_users+all_average_MobDex*all_average_sessions)/(unique_users+all_average_sessions)  (3)where “average_MobDex” is defined in expression (2) and is anapplication quality score of the specific computer application in thetime period; “unique_users” is defined in expression (1) and is thenumber of unique users for the specific computer application in the timeperiod; “all_average_MobDex” is the above mentioned average of allindividual quality scores of all the computer applications in theplurality of computer application in the time period; and“all_average_sessions” is the above mentioned average total number ofunique users (e.g., “all_average_sessions”, etc.) of all individualtotal numbers of unique users of all the computer applications in theplurality of computer applications in the time period.

The weighted quality score (e.g., “weighted_MobDex”, etc.) of a computerapplication has some advantage over the “plain” unweighted quality score(e.g., “average_Mobdex”, etc.) because the computation of the weightedquality score includes metrics from all computer applications in aplurality of computer applications, for which the computer applicationquality measurement system (102) collects application event reports. Abasic aspect that differentiates the computations of the weightedquality score and the unweighted quality score is represented by theinclusion of popularities of all the computer applications in theplurality of computer applications in the computation of the weightedquality score.

For example, even when a computer application has produced zero, or veryfew crashes, the computer application will not be given a quality scoreof near 100 if the computer application is not a popular computerapplication among a plurality of computer applications. However, if thecomputer application has a total number of unique users in a time periodthat is comparable to, or much larger (e.g., two times, three times,etc.) than, the average total number of unique users across all thecomputer applications in a plurality of computer applications, thecontribution of the quality score computed based on data intrinsic tothe computer application will be relatively significant, or evendominant.

It should be noted that various ways of incorporating factors other thanthe population and data intrinsic to a specific computer application ora specific computer application release may be used to evaluate thequality of the specific computer application. For example, cutoffs,thresholds, user input, default values, subjectively determined relevantvalues, etc., can be incorporated in the computation of the quality of aspecific computer application release or a specific computer applicationrelease, for example, in order to minimize the impact of largedeviations when a data set is small, etc.

6. Example Process Flows

FIG. 5A illustrates an example process flow. In some embodiments, thisprocess flow is performed through one or more computing devices orunits. In block 502, a computer application quality measurement system(e.g., 102 of FIG. 1, etc.) determines a first number of unique usersfor a computer application release. The first number of unique usersrepresents a total number of unique users who have launched the computerapplication release on user devices.

In block 504, the computer application quality measurement system (102)determines a second number of unique users for the computer applicationrelease. The second number of unique users represents a total number ofunique users who have encountered at least once an abnormal terminationwith the computer application release on user devices.

In block 504, the computer application quality measurement system (102)uses the determined first number of unique users and the determinedsecond number of users as numeric input to compute a quality score forthe computer application release.

In an embodiment, the first number of unique users is determined for aspecific time range, and wherein the second number of unique users isdetermined in the same specific time range. In an embodiment, thespecific time range is determined based on a time at which a request fora quality indication of a specific computer application is received, andwherein one or more versions of the specific computer applicationinclude the computer application release. In an embodiment, the specifictime range is determined based on a time specified in a request for aquality indication of a specific computer application, and wherein oneor more versions of the specific computer application include thecomputer application release.

In an embodiment, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is further configured to perform: collecting application eventreports from each user device in a plurality of user devices, on each ofwhich at least one computer application release in a set of computerapplication releases has been launched, wherein the application eventreports comprise one or more application launch log events of theindividual computer application release and zero or more applicationabnormal termination events of the individual computer applicationrelease; and determining, based on the one or more application launchlog events of the computer application release and the zero or moreapplication abnormal termination events of the computer applicationrelease, the first number of unique users and the second number ofunique users.

In an embodiment, each of the one or more application launch log eventsof the computer application release and the zero or more applicationabnormal termination events of the computer application release isemitted from one of the computer application release or an operatingsystem in which the computer application release was launched.

In an embodiment, at least one of the one or more application launch logevents of the computer application release or the zero or moreapplication abnormal termination events of the computer applicationrelease is delayed until a user device establishes network access to aquality measurement system.

In an embodiment, each of the one or more application launch log eventsof the individual computer application release or the zero or moreapplication abnormal termination events of the individual computerapplication release comprises a unique user identifier (UUID) for a userwho has launched the computer application release on a user device; theUUID for the user distinguishes the user from all other users with otherUUIDs that each are different from the UUID.

In an embodiment, each of the one or more application launch log eventsof the individual computer application release or the zero or moreapplication abnormal termination events of the individual computerapplication release further comprises (a) a computer application releaseidentifier and (2) a time value indicating when a correspondingtriggering event occurs.

In an embodiment, the steps of determining a first number of uniqueusers, determining a second number of unique users, and using the firstnumber of unique users and the second number of unique users as numericinput to compute a quality score is performed in response to receiving arequest for a quality indication of a specific computer application, andthe computer application release represents a version of the specificcomputer application.

In an embodiment, the steps of determining a first number of uniqueusers, determining a second number of unique users, and using the firstnumber of unique users and the second number of unique users as numericinput to compute a quality score is performed before receiving a requestfor a quality indication of a specific computer application, and thecomputer application release represents a version of the specificcomputer application.

In an embodiment, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is further configured to perform: determining a third number ofunique users for a second computer application release, the third numberof unique users represents a total number of unique users who havelaunched the second computer application release, and the computerapplication release and the second computer application releaserepresent two different versions of a specific computer application;determining a fourth number of unique users for the second computerapplication release, the fourth number of unique users represents atotal number of unique users who have encountered at least once anabnormal termination with the second computer application release; andusing the determined third number of unique users and the determinedfourth number of users as numeric input to compute a second qualityscore for the second computer application release.

In an embodiment, the computer application release is an immediateupgrade to the second computer application release for the specificcomputer application.

In an embodiment, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is further configured to send the quality score and the secondquality score to an application quality query client in response toreceiving a request for a quality indication of the specific computerapplication from the application quality query client.

In an embodiment, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is further configured to use the computed quality score and thecomputed second quality score as numeric input to compute an applicationquality score for the specific computer application.

In an embodiment, the computer application quality measurement system(102) is further configured to send the application quality score to anapplication quality query client in response to receiving a request fora quality indication of the specific computer application from theapplication quality query client.

In an embodiment, the determined first total number of unique users, thedetermined second total number of unique users, the determined thirdtotal number of unique users, the determined fourth total number ofunique users, are all related to a specific time range.

FIG. 5B illustrates an example process flow. In some embodiments, thisprocess flow is performed through one or more computing devices orunits. In block 552, a computer application quality measurement system(e.g., 102 of FIG. 1, etc.) determines an application quality score of aspecific computer application.

In block 554, the computer application quality measurement system (102)determines a total number of unique users who have launched at least onecomputer application release that is a version of the specific computerapplication.

In block 556, the computer application quality measurement system (102)determines an average application quality score across a plurality ofcomputer applications.

In block 558, the computer application quality measurement system (102)determines an average number of unique users, who have launched as leastone computer application release in a computer application in theplurality of computer applications;

In block 510, the computer application quality measurement system (102)uses the determined application quality score of the specific computerapplication, the determined total number of unique users for thespecific computer application, the determined average applicationquality score and the determined average number of unique users asnumeric input to compute a weighted application quality score for thespecific computer application.

In an embodiment, the determined application quality score of thespecific computer application, the determined total number of uniqueusers for the specific computer application, the determined averageapplication quality score, and the determined average number of uniqueusers, are all related to a specific time range.

In an embodiment, the plurality of computer applications includes thespecific computer application. In another embodiment, the plurality ofcomputer applications excludes the specific computer application.

In an embodiment, an apparatus comprises a processor and is configuredto perform any of the foregoing methods.

In an embodiment, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium,storing software instructions, which when executed by one or moreprocessors cause performance of any of the foregoing methods.

Note that, although separate embodiments are discussed herein, anycombination of embodiments and/or partial embodiments discussed hereinmay be combined to form further embodiments.

In an embodiment, a computing device comprising one or more processorsand one or more storage media storing a set of instructions which, whenexecuted by the one or more processors, cause performance of any of theforegoing methods.

7. Implementation Mechanisms—Hardware Overview

According to one embodiment, the techniques described herein areimplemented by one or more special-purpose computing devices. Thespecial-purpose computing devices may be hard-wired to perform thetechniques, or may include digital electronic devices such as one ormore application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) or fieldprogrammable gate arrays (FPGAs) that are persistently programmed toperform the techniques, or may include one or more general purposehardware processors programmed to perform the techniques pursuant toprogram instructions in firmware, memory, other storage, or acombination. Such special-purpose computing devices may also combinecustom hard-wired logic, ASICs, or FPGAs with custom programming toaccomplish the techniques. The special-purpose computing devices may bedesktop computer systems, portable computer systems, handheld devices,networking devices or any other device that incorporates hard-wiredand/or program logic to implement the techniques.

For example, FIG. 6 is a block diagram that illustrates a computersystem 600 upon which an embodiment of the invention may be implemented.Computer system 600 includes a bus 602 or other communication mechanismfor communicating information, and a hardware processor 604 coupled withbus 602 for processing information. Hardware processor 604 may be, forexample, a general purpose microprocessor.

Computer system 600 also includes a main memory 606, such as a randomaccess memory (RAM) or other dynamic storage device, coupled to bus 602for storing information and instructions to be executed by processor604. Main memory 606 also may be used for storing temporary variables orother intermediate information during execution of instructions to beexecuted by processor 604. Such instructions, when stored innon-transitory storage media accessible to processor 604, rendercomputer system 600 into a special-purpose machine that is customized toperform the operations specified in the instructions.

Computer system 600 further includes a read only memory (ROM) 608 orother static storage device coupled to bus 602 for storing staticinformation and instructions for processor 604. A storage device 610,such as a magnetic disk or optical disk, is provided and coupled to bus602 for storing information and instructions.

Computer system 600 may be coupled via bus 602 to a display 612, such asa liquid crystal display, for displaying information to a computer user.An input device 614, including alphanumeric and other keys, is coupledto bus 602 for communicating information and command selections toprocessor 604. Another type of user input device is cursor control 616,such as a mouse, a trackball, or cursor direction keys for communicatingdirection information and command selections to processor 604 and forcontrolling cursor movement on display 612. This input device typicallyhas two degrees of freedom in two axes, a first axis (e.g., x) and asecond axis (e.g., y), that allows the device to specify positions in aplane.

Computer system 600 may implement the techniques described herein usingcustomized hard-wired logic, one or more ASICs or FPGAs, firmware and/orprogram logic which in combination with the computer system causes orprograms computer system 600 to be a special-purpose machine. Accordingto one embodiment, the techniques as described herein are performed bycomputer system 600 in response to processor 604 executing one or moresequences of one or more instructions contained in main memory 606. Suchinstructions may be read into main memory 606 from another storagemedium, such as storage device 610. Execution of the sequences ofinstructions contained in main memory 606 causes processor 604 toperform the process steps described herein. In alternative embodiments,hard-wired circuitry may be used in place of or in combination withsoftware instructions.

The term “storage media” as used herein refers to any non-transitorymedia that store data and/or instructions that cause a machine tooperation in a specific fashion. Such storage media may comprisenon-volatile media and/or volatile media. Non-volatile media includes,for example, optical or magnetic disks, such as storage device 610.Volatile media includes dynamic memory, such as main memory 606. Commonforms of storage media include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexibledisk, hard disk, solid state drive, magnetic tape, or any other magneticdata storage medium, a CD-ROM, any other optical data storage medium,any physical medium with patterns of holes, a RAM, a PROM, and EPROM, aFLASH-EPROM, NVRAM, any other memory chip or cartridge.

Storage media is distinct from but may be used in conjunction withtransmission media. Transmission media participates in transferringinformation between storage media. For example, transmission mediaincludes coaxial cables, copper wire and fiber optics, including thewires that comprise bus 602. Transmission media can also take the formof acoustic or light waves, such as those generated during radio-waveand infra-red data communications.

Various forms of media may be involved in carrying one or more sequencesof one or more instructions to processor 604 for execution. For example,the instructions may initially be carried on a magnetic disk or solidstate drive of a remote computer. The remote computer can load theinstructions into its dynamic memory and send the instructions over atelephone line using a modem. A modem local to computer system 600 canreceive the data on the telephone line and use an infra-red transmitterto convert the data to an infra-red signal. An infra-red detector canreceive the data carried in the infra-red signal and appropriatecircuitry can place the data on bus 602. Bus 602 carries the data tomain memory 606, from which processor 604 retrieves and executes theinstructions. The instructions received by main memory 606 mayoptionally be stored on storage device 610 either before or afterexecution by processor 604.

Computer system 600 also includes a communication interface 618 coupledto bus 602. Communication interface 618 provides a two-way datacommunication coupling to a network link 620 that is connected to alocal network 622. For example, communication interface 618 may be anintegrated services digital network (ISDN) card, cable modem, satellitemodem, or a modem to provide a data communication connection to acorresponding type of telephone line. As another example, communicationinterface 618 may be a local area network (LAN) card to provide a datacommunication connection to a compatible LAN. Wireless links may also beimplemented. In any such implementation, communication interface 618sends and receives electrical, electromagnetic or optical signals thatcarry digital data streams representing various types of information.

Network link 620 typically provides data communication through one ormore networks to other data devices. For example, network link 620 mayprovide a connection through local network 622 to a host computer 624 orto data equipment operated by an Internet Service Provider (ISP) 626.ISP 626 in turn provides data communication services through the worldwide packet data communication network now commonly referred to as the“Internet” 628. Local network 622 and Internet 628 both use electrical,electromagnetic or optical signals that carry digital data streams. Thesignals through the various networks and the signals on network link 620and through communication interface 618, which carry the digital data toand from computer system 600, are example forms of transmission media.

Computer system 600 can send messages and receive data, includingprogram code, through the network(s), network link 620 and communicationinterface 618. In the Internet example, a server 630 might transmit arequested code for an application program through Internet 628, ISP 626,local network 622 and communication interface 618.

The received code may be executed by processor 604 as it is received,and/or stored in storage device 610, or other non-volatile storage forlater execution.

8. Equivalents, Extensions, Alternatives and Miscellaneous

In the foregoing specification, embodiments of the invention have beendescribed with reference to numerous specific details that may vary fromimplementation to implementation. Thus, the sole and exclusive indicatorof what is the invention, and is intended by the applicants to be theinvention, is the set of claims that issue from this application, in thespecific form in which such claims issue, including any subsequentcorrection. Any definitions expressly set forth herein for termscontained in such claims shall govern the meaning of such terms as usedin the claims. Hence, no limitation, element, property, feature,advantage or attribute that is not expressly recited in a claim shouldlimit the scope of such claim in any way. The specification and drawingsare, accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative rather than arestrictive sense.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method, comprising: determining a first number of unique users for a computer application release, the first number of unique users representing a total number of unique users who have launched the computer application release on user devices; determining a second number of unique users for the computer application release, the second number of unique users representing a total number of unique users who have encountered at least one abnormal termination with the computer application release on user devices; and computing a quality score for the computer application release using at least the determined first number of unique users and the determined second number of unique users; wherein the method is performed by one or more computing devices.
 2. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the first number of unique users is determined for a specific time range, and wherein the second number of unique users is determined in the same specific time range.
 3. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: collecting application event reports from a plurality of user devices, wherein the application event reports comprise one or more application launch log events of the individual computer application release and one or more application abnormal termination events of the individual computer application release; and determining, based on the one or more application launch log events of the computer application release and the one or more application abnormal termination events of the computer application release, the first number of unique users and the second number of unique users.
 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a third number of unique users for a second computer application release, wherein the third number of unique users represents a total number of unique users who have launched the second computer application release, and wherein the computer application release and the second computer application release represent two different versions of a specific computer application; determining a fourth number of unique users for the second computer application release, wherein the fourth number of unique users represents a total number of unique users who have encountered at least once an abnormal termination with the second computer application release; and computing a second quality score for the second computer application release using at least the determined third number of unique users and the determined fourth number of users.
 5. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the computer application release is one of two latest versions of a specific computer application.
 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising computing an application quality score for a specific computer application using the computed quality score of the specific computer application release and a second quality score of a preceding computer application release, wherein the specific computer application release and the preceding computer application release represent two versions of the specific computer application released most recently.
 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining an application quality score of a specific computer application; determining a total number of unique users who have launched at least one computer application release that is a version of the specific computer application; determining an average application quality score across a plurality of computer applications; determining an average number of unique users, who have launched as least one computer application release in a computer application in the plurality of computer applications; and computing a weighted application quality score for the specific computer application using at least the determined application quality score of the specific computer application, the determined total number of unique users for the specific computer application, the determined average application quality score and the determined average number of unique users.
 8. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the quality score for the computer application release is specific to one of one or more different types of errors that causes the computer application release to crash, one or more different types of operating systems, one or more different types of devices, one or more vendors, or one or more different geo locations.
 9. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium, storing software instructions, which when executed by one or more processors cause performance of steps of: determining a first number of unique users for a computer application release, the first number of unique users representing a total number of unique users who have launched the computer application release on user devices; determining a second number of unique users for the computer application release, the second number of unique users representing a total number of unique users who have encountered at least one abnormal termination with the computer application release on user devices; and computing a quality score for the computer application release using at least the determined first number of unique users and the determined second number of unique users.
 10. The medium as recited in claim 9, wherein the first number of unique users is determined for a specific time range, and wherein the second number of unique users is determined in the same specific time range.
 11. The medium as recited in claim 9, wherein the steps further comprises: collecting application event reports from a plurality of user devices, wherein the application event reports comprise one or more application launch log events of the individual computer application release and one or more application abnormal termination events of the individual computer application release; and determining, based on the one or more application launch log events of the computer application release and the one or more application abnormal termination events of the computer application release, the first number of unique users and the second number of unique users.
 12. The medium as recited in claim 9, wherein the steps further comprises: determining a third number of unique users for a second computer application release, wherein the third number of unique users represents a total number of unique users who have launched the second computer application release, and wherein the computer application release and the second computer application release represent two different versions of a specific computer application; determining a fourth number of unique users for the second computer application release, wherein the fourth number of unique users represents a total number of unique users who have encountered at least once an abnormal termination with the second computer application release; and computing a second quality score for the second computer application release using at least the determined third number of unique users and the determined fourth number of users.
 13. The medium as recited in claim 9, wherein the computer application release is one of the two latest versions of a specific computer application.
 14. The medium as recited in claim 9, wherein the steps further comprises computing an application quality score for a specific computer application using the computed quality score of the specific computer application release and a second quality score of a preceding computer application release, wherein the specific computer application release and the preceding computer application release represent two versions of the specific computer application released most recently.
 15. The medium as recited in claim 9, wherein the steps further comprises: determining an application quality score of a specific computer application; determining a total number of unique users who have launched at least one computer application release that is a version of the specific computer application; determining an average application quality score across a plurality of computer applications; determining an average number of unique users, who have launched as least one computer application release in a computer application in the plurality of computer applications; and computing a weighted application quality score for the specific computer application using at least the determined application quality score of the specific computer application, the determined total number of unique users for the specific computer application, the determined average application quality score and the determined average number of unique users.
 16. An apparatus comprising: a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines a first number of unique users for a computer application release, the first number of unique users representing a total number of unique users who have launched the computer application release on user devices; a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines a second number of unique users for the computer application release, the second number of unique users representing a total number of unique users who have encountered at least one abnormal termination with the computer application release on user devices; and a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that computes a quality score for the computer application release using at least the determined first number of unique users and the determined second number of unique users.
 17. The apparatus as recited in claim 16, wherein the first number of unique users is determined for a specific time range, and wherein the second number of unique users is determined in the same specific time range.
 18. The apparatus as recited in claim 16, further comprising: a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that collects application event reports from a plurality of user devices, wherein the application event reports comprise one or more application launch log events of the individual computer application release and one or more application abnormal termination events of the individual computer application release; and a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines, based on the one or more application launch log events of the computer application release and the one or more application abnormal termination events of the computer application release, the first number of unique users and the second number of unique users.
 19. The apparatus as recited in claim 16, further comprising: a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines a third number of unique users for a second computer application release, wherein the third number of unique users represents a total number of unique users who have launched the second computer application release, and wherein the computer application release and the second computer application release represent two different versions of a specific computer application; a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines a fourth number of unique users for the second computer application release, wherein the fourth number of unique users represents a total number of unique users who have encountered at least once an abnormal termination with the second computer application release; and a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that computes a second quality score for the second computer application release using at least the determined third number of unique users and the determined fourth number of users.
 20. The apparatus as recited in claim 16, further comprising a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that computes an application quality score for a specific computer application using the computed quality score of the specific computer application release and a second quality score of a preceding computer application release, wherein the specific computer application release and the preceding computer application release represent two versions of the specific computer application released most recently.
 21. The apparatus as recited in claim 16, further comprising: a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines an application quality score of a specific computer application; a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines a total number of unique users who have launched at least one computer application release that is a version of the specific computer application; a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines an average application quality score across a plurality of computer applications; a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that determines an average number of unique users, who have launched as least one computer application release in a computer application in the plurality of computer applications; and a subsystem, implemented at least partially in hardware, that computes a weighted application quality score for the specific computer application using at least the determined application quality score of the specific computer application, the determined total number of unique users for the specific computer application, the determined average application quality score and the determined average number of unique users. 